This series of articles by Bhante Cintitahttps://bhikkhucintita.wordpress.com/ho ... -buddhism/that Ven Gavesako linked to recently are an interesting, though somewhat rambling, discussion of Folk vs Essential Buddhism, and how they are necessary for each other. In particular, the theme is how Folk Buddhism involves integration of local culture.

And, of course, the key question (not fully developed in the series yet) is:

A common factor in the way the Refuges are practiced and understood in American Folk Buddhism is free-thinking, captured for instance in the following quote:

“Believe nothing, no matter where you read it, or who said it, no matter if I have said it, unless it agrees with your own reason and your own common sense.” - “The Buddha”

Free-thinking is related to the Protestant rejection of authority that we discussed last week, but more importantly to the post-(European-)Enlightenment regard for rational or critical thinking and the parallel disparagement of “faith,” and accounts for the popularity in the West of the quote above. This passage was however never spoken by the Buddha. I don’t know who made it up.

It is hardly surprising that individualism as a strong factor in American and Western culture should also be a strong factor in American and Western Folk Buddhism. Here, as with other aspects of Folk Buddhism, my interest will be in investigating to what extent its particular forms are friendly to, indifferent to or inimical to Essential Buddhism.

Our Authentic Self. A common Western Folk understanding is that Buddhism (or sometimes Zen) is about getting to know, trust and to free your authentic, inner or true self or nature, a self that has been suppressed by social conditioning and other inauthentic factors, but when unleashed is the source of creativity, spirituality, virtue and wisdom. Often the authentic self is identified with Buddha Nature, a pristine aspect of ourselves free from defilement, which is capable of awakening or even already awakened.

If these statements do not have a Buddhist origin, where did they come from? The answer is … European Romanticism and its later expressions.

As Bhante says, a characteristic of Folk Buddhism is drawing on local culture...

mikenz66 wrote:As Bhante says, a characteristic of Folk Buddhism is drawing on local culture...

Looks an interesting article I'll take a read, but my first observation would be that by the above definition a very large proportion of Asian Theravadin buddhism would be in fact Folk Buddhism.

"Proper effort is not the effort to make something particular happen. It is the effort to be aware and awake each moment." - Ajahn Chah"When we see beyond self, we no longer cling to happiness. When we stop clinging, we can begin to be happy." - Ajahn Chah"Know and watch your heart. It’s pure but emotions come to colour it." — Ajahn Chah

Goofaholix wrote:Looks an interesting article I'll take a read, but my first observation would be that by the above definition a very large proportion of Asian Theravadin buddhism would be in fact Folk Buddhism.

Yes, that's the Thesis: In all places there is what he calls "Folk" and "Essential" Buddhism, both symbiotically supportive (as long as they don't go completely off the rails).

So the question is: which "folk" aspects in the West are supportive of "essential" Buddhism, and which might be destructive? And which, in fact, are the "folk" bits?

To be deliberately provocative, for the sake of discussion, one could wonder to what extent the western emphasis on individuality, analytical thought, and so on are potentially problematic?

I offer the forgoing as a caveat, since I sense that many of my compatriots are ready in the spirit of McKale [McKale's Navy] to reject many of the underpinnings of Essential Buddhism out of hand before they are properly understood. This reinforces the Protestant rejection of authority, elements of religiosity and disregard for the community institutions already described as problematic in American Folk Buddhism. We need to temper or individualism with wisdom that we not throw important elements of Essential Buddhism naively out with the bathwater.

I.e. do some western Buddhist who think they are practising "Essential Buddhism" really practising "Western Folk Buddhism"?

I guess that what we are doing here, we can call Western "Folk" Buddhism. *smile* Guess what makes it mostly alive in Western world.

Just that! *smile*...We Buddhists must find the courage to leave our temples and enter the temples of human experience, temples that are filled with suffering. If we listen to Buddha, Christ, or Gandhi, we can do nothing else. The refugee camps, the prisons, the ghettos, and the battlefields will become our temples. We have so much work to do. ... Peace is Possible! Step by Step. - Samtach Preah Maha Ghosananda "Step by Step" http://www.ghosananda.org/bio_book.html

BUT! it is important to become a real Buddhist first. Like Punna did: Punna Sutta Nate sante baram sokham _()_

“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.” - Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Learn this from the waters:in mountain clefts and chasms,loud gush the streamlets,but great rivers flow silently.- Sutta Nipata 3.725

mikenz66 wrote:I.e. do some western Buddhist who think they are practising "Essential Buddhism" really practising "Western Folk Buddhism"?

Inevitably there are of course, though I'm not sure whether he's presented a strong case for what constitutes Western (or American i'm not sure how this is supposed to differ from Western) Folk Buddhism.

His first article about authority appears to reach the conclusion that western democratic and egalitarian ideals are closer to Essential Buddhism (with the model of a teacher being a spiritual friend) than it is to Asian hierarchical structures, so presumably not Folk Buddhism.

The second article is about taking the invitation to test and come and see for yourself and the Kalama sutta etc too far, I guess he's got a point here. Critical thinking is an important faculty for human development though, it's not just a Western thing, but it does need to be balanced with confidence in the Dhamma.

The third about the use of the term Sangha to refer to a community or fellowship of Buddhists rather than the more narrow scriptural definition I agree is definately a sign of Folk Buddhism, though it's just a terminology thing really.

The last about Individualism again Western ideals of standing on your own two feet and taking responsibility for yourself are closer to Essential Buddhism than Asian attitudes, though it would be easy to take this too far and be too much an Island. However at the end of this the sentence that really points to Western Folk Buddhism to me is "It must be understood that Buddhism is not about self-expression, it is about expressly abandoning a self."

In the West Buddhism seems to be part of the self help industry and linked to western psychology. Often people are interested in digging deeply into their story and past traumas to look for healing they are looking to heal and reinforce the self rather than abandon it. Wheras Essential Buddhism is about seeing that self view is part of the problem not part of the solution and that by letting go of this all the stories with the self at the centre that we thought were such problems just fall away into irrelevance. To me this is the biggest part of Western Folk Buddhism, but as the article says it's a useful and important entry point for many people so not necessarily a bad thing.

"Proper effort is not the effort to make something particular happen. It is the effort to be aware and awake each moment." - Ajahn Chah"When we see beyond self, we no longer cling to happiness. When we stop clinging, we can begin to be happy." - Ajahn Chah"Know and watch your heart. It’s pure but emotions come to colour it." — Ajahn Chah

Thanks for the extensive reply. I think you're right about the "self help" thing. And, of course, you're right that one of the overarching themes is that "Folk Buddhism" isn't actually a bad thing if it heads people in roughly the right direction.

Many thanks for a very interesting set of articles which I have book-marked for later study.

I was initially puzzled as to how we are to define the "essence" in "essential Buddhism". It turns out that what Bhante is advocating is (essentially!) a healthy bit of philosophical realism, which cheered me up no end. Essential Buddhism is that which is sustained by those adepts who come into contact with the reality of what the teaching points to.

Goofaholix wrote:In the West Buddhism seems to be part of the self help industry and linked to western psychology. Often people are interested in digging deeply into their story and past traumas to look for healing they are looking to heal and reinforce the self rather than abandon it. Wheras Essential Buddhism is about seeing that self view is part of the problem not part of the solution and that by letting go of this all the stories with the self at the centre that we thought were such problems just fall away into irrelevance.

This sometimes results in the so-called spiritual bypass, when the stories are taken to have "faded into irrelevance" but are instead hiding in the shadow of a bigger and subtler self. My first retreat was with a lay Sri Lankan teacher who promptly informed me that he had more than 500 disciples in Sri Lanka ready to buy him land and property for a centre. He later signed up for a retreat with a Zen teacher and proceeded to try to demolish the teacher doctrinally while nominally a student in a strict Zen retreat. It was not pretty.

I also heard a teacher confess that after several decades of living at a temple, certain tendencies just don't arise anymore until one is in a lay environment, dealing with different kinds of people and new challenges.

The point is that few manage to cut the root and in the meantime, the branches are ready to sprout flowers and bear fruit given the "right" conditions.

Would an aspect of western folk buddhism be that there "is" an essence beyond folk Buddhism that can be found when all the layers are striped away (A Buddhist holy grail of pure and definitive Buddha Vacana)?

Mr Man wrote:Would an aspect of western folk buddhism be that there "is" an essence beyond folk Buddhism that can be found when all the layers are striped away (A Buddhist holy grail of pure and definitive Buddha Vacana)?

Probably; that there are, to be accurate, many Buddhisms is a necessary result of the very structure of the Sangha (alms-round, lay contact generally, etc.). Evaluating ones own flavor as superior is going too far, but looking for "the commonality" also seems to be going about it with flawed premises, as has been pointed out (Western emphasis on doctrine, canonical and ecclesiastical frameworks for understanding dhamma, sangha, etc.).

I tend to ascertain whether or not I am willing to call some circumscribed group 'Buddhist' according to the texts (broadly understood) they accept as authoritative. How those texts are then used is a distinguishing feature of the traditions, vehicles, etc. which are on offer. One common thing seems to be that people tend to have a few favorite Suttas/Sutras to which they refer; I think this approach, tempered with appropriate Sila and Samadhi, is probably of great benefit, but it makes the choice of texts a rather important affair...

"And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting oneself one protects others? By the pursuit, development, and cultivation of the four establishments of mindfulness. It is in such a way that by protecting oneself one protects others.

"And how is it, bhikkhus, that by protecting others one protects oneself? By patience, harmlessness, goodwill, and sympathy. It is in such a way that by protecting others one protects oneself.- Sedaka Sutta [SN 47.19]

Mr. Man wrote:Would an aspect of western folk buddhism be that there "is" an essence beyond folk Buddhism that can be found when all the layers are striped away (A Buddhist holy grail of pure and definitive Buddha Vacana)?

I'm pretty sure all Buddhist traditions, western or not, vehemently believe that their particular brand is most representitive of some 'essence of Buddhism.'

Westerners have their empiricism, their romanticism, their individualism, and appropriate the authority of The Buddha and Buddhism to validate those values. Hence we see the Kalama Sutta being waved about on here so often. The Western pursuit of an 'essence' in the texts leads them, naively, to their own image. Westerners love their own image, so I think we can characterize Western Folk Buddhism as being narcissistic.

I see in the last few installments he has moved on to the topic of gender equality.

Again no surprises from what I can tell Western Folk Buddhism has much more in common with Essential Buddhism than the inequality common in Asian Folk Buddhism.

I was interested that several monks and nuns rules were designed to prevent nuns falling into a servant role to monks as was common in wider society.

"Proper effort is not the effort to make something particular happen. It is the effort to be aware and awake each moment." - Ajahn Chah"When we see beyond self, we no longer cling to happiness. When we stop clinging, we can begin to be happy." - Ajahn Chah"Know and watch your heart. It’s pure but emotions come to colour it." — Ajahn Chah

Mr. Man wrote:Would an aspect of western folk buddhism be that there "is" an essence beyond folk Buddhism that can be found when all the layers are striped away (A Buddhist holy grail of pure and definitive Buddha Vacana)?

Westerners have their empiricism, their romanticism, their individualism, and appropriate the authority of The Buddha and Buddhism to validate those values. Hence we see the Kalama Sutta being waved about on here so often. The Western pursuit of an 'essence' in the texts leads them, naively, to their own image. Westerners love their own image, so I think we can characterize Western Folk Buddhism as being narcissistic.

A bit of a brutal generalisation, but some bitter truth may just be contained therein...

Viscid wrote:The Western pursuit of an 'essence' in the texts leads them, naively, to their own image. Westerners love their own image, so I think we can characterize Western Folk Buddhism as being narcissistic.

Surely Asians went through much the same process 2000 or so years ago when they integrated Buddhism into their own cultures and reinterpreted the more radical aspects.

"Proper effort is not the effort to make something particular happen. It is the effort to be aware and awake each moment." - Ajahn Chah"When we see beyond self, we no longer cling to happiness. When we stop clinging, we can begin to be happy." - Ajahn Chah"Know and watch your heart. It’s pure but emotions come to colour it." — Ajahn Chah

There is an interesting response from a Pure Land monastic perspective to an article which appeared recently in the American press:

"North American Buddhists are likely to create their own traditions and schools of thought, but they should do so with the awareness that they are forging a new Buddhist culture, not the ‘true’ Buddhist culture."

Sanitizing of Buddhism, Buddhists and erasing Sangha in America by Elitists

2,555 years ago Buddha passed away leaving the disciples and the rest of the Sangha to remember his teachings and pass them along to the next generations. Very little has changed in the Sangha who carefully follows the Vinaya which are his guidelines of monastic conduct and instructed in his last bequest. They carried Buddha’s teachings (the Dharma) to various countries teaching and forming practice places for generations with a great deal of sacrifice and effort.Recently in media by Buddhist orientated sites online and in print through Tricycle, Buddhadharma, and Shambala Sun much has been made about the national form that Buddhist followers should or as they assume will eventually take in the USA.Their Protestantism of Buddhism or rather a sanitizing or erasing/rewriting of Buddha’s history and rejection of what they identify as irrelevant to modern Americans today. ... This sanitizing of Buddhism is wrong. It is a symptom of lack of effort and study of Buddha dharma. It’s rote repetition of wrong teachings based on fear of loss of their own leadership due to aging and somehow they must keep their flame alive and make a historical memory so their efforts don’t seem wasted to others. The fact of the matter is the hippies are old and their start into Buddhism was filled with false intentions, most are failed monks and they are damn mad that people did not support them when they were innocents in robes, so they formed their careers by damning the robes and those that wear them. All of them… look up the writers for yourself in the rags, tricycle, shambala sun, buddha dharma, the big 3 have featured all white… and all secular people claiming to be experts and leaders of Americans ‘cuz they failed to be monks.They said they failed to be monks because they failed to get enough dana to do as they want to do (and become hits in their homelands). Instead they were ignored perhaps bored in their robes, fearing poverty and they lacked the balls to stick it out they left their robes because there is no money in them. Then these ex-monks damned repeatedly the very people who had virtuous roots that helped them succeed and go forth and being accepted.Playing king of the mountain pushing off their competitors. They promoted themselves as experts saying they have really represented Americans cuz they can have sex and create families… and they want their kids to be able to participate fully in their activities in the zendo cuz they don’t feel welcome anyplace but where they want to go and meditate while they ignore how bored their kids are waiting for them and let their kids run around doing things unsupervised while they zone out in hippie bliss or their mental version of it. ...

Interesting blog Bhante. A little petulant, perhaps... Do you know which occasion with Bhikkhu Bodhi the blog is referring to here?

Led by the protestant versions of Japanese Buddhism and fringe trend setting teachers and all their writers who make them money… virtually ignoring the Sangha “”(they had one show Bhikkhu Bodhi who got rightfully upset with them and whom they posted as somehow he misunderstood..or he mis-heard them and gee wasn’t that embarrassing for him to explode on them during the conference type post on their blog) on whose back they cruelly stepped on to reach their goal as King of the Mountain, they virtually stood and pissed on the the living Jewels, all the while laughing in the faces of those who donate and sacrifice to make Buddhist temples and monasteries in the Americas.

Bhikkhu Bodhi (Theravada’s mouthpiece) makes implication (unfounded) that there are “mundane aggregates” as opposed to ‘supermundane’ aggregates in addition to a non-Suttic dogmatic claim that “…there is implication that there are aggregates which are anasava (taintless)” ...

There is no dogma, nothing to take on blind faith. But that does not keep the blog from lambasting the great American scholar-monk, Bhikkhu Bodhi. Liberation is an experience. Unfortunately, for many Buddhism has become a religion to identify with rather than what the Buddha set out -- a path to practice.

I guess it is inevitable, given it's cultural background, that some strands of Western Buddhism search for some sort of "one true Buddhism". On the other hand, other strands draw in a dizzying variety of ideas from various traditions (Buddhist, other Asian, Romantic)...